The HCPC Fitness to Practise Process
When a concern is referred to the HCPC, it is initially considered by case managers who assess whether it raises a question about the registrant's fitness to practise. If it does, an investigating committee panel considers whether there is a case to answer. If the case proceeds, it is referred to a Conduct and Competence Committee, a Health Committee, or a Registration Appeals Panel, depending on the nature of the concern. The HCPC's Standards of Conduct, Performance and Ethics set out the expectations all registrants must meet.
Types of Allegations Faced by HCPC Registrants
HCPC fitness to practise proceedings may arise from clinical errors, poor professional performance or lack of competence, failure to maintain proper records or documentation, dishonesty or fraud, inappropriate conduct towards service users, workplace conduct concerns including bullying or harassment, health impairment including substance dependency, criminal convictions or cautions, concerns following a serious incident or complaint, social media misconduct, and concerns about fitness to practise in a specialist area of practice.
What the HCPC Considers in Fitness to Practise Proceedings
The HCPC's overriding objective is the protection of the public. Panels consider whether fitness to practise is currently impaired and, if so, what sanction is necessary to protect the public and uphold public confidence in the profession. Key factors include the seriousness of the conduct or performance concerns, whether the conduct is remediable, the extent to which genuine insight has been demonstrated, evidence of remedial action, and the risk of repetition. A registrant who can demonstrate genuine insight and commitment to improvement is in a significantly stronger position than one who cannot.
Competence Cases and Systemic Context
In competence and performance cases, it is frequently important to examine the context in which the concerns arose — including the adequacy of training and supervision, the resources available, the systems in place within the employing organisation, and the standards that could reasonably be expected of a registrant at your level of experience. Systemic failings are not a complete defence, but they can be highly relevant to the assessment of individual culpability. We ensure those factors are properly identified and evidenced.
Available Defences, Mitigation, and Your Right to Choose Your Solicitor
Where facts are disputed, we challenge the evidence put forward by the HCPC, seek independent professional expert opinion, identify weaknesses in the investigating panel's conclusions, and present your account as effectively as possible. Where facts are accepted, we focus on presenting the strongest possible case in mitigation — including evidence of insight, steps taken to address concerns, testimonials from colleagues and supervisors, retraining records, and any relevant personal circumstances. Many HCPC registrants can instruct a solicitor of their own choosing with costs met by their professional body or insurer — contact us and we will review your cover at no obligation.